Search for: "BOWMAN v. STATE" Results 361 - 380 of 412
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Apr 2018, 9:30 pm by Bobby Chen
He also nominated Michelle Bowman, Commissioner of the State Bank of Kansas, for a seat on the board reserved for someone with community banking experience. [read post]
6 Oct 2010, 5:28 am
Respondents named education, jobs and health care as their top three concerns in the elections, while immigration ranked fifth.CHOICE ELECTIONPBS NewsHour's Quinn Bowman reports:Democrats are eager to make 2010 a choice election, as opposed to a referendum on President Obama and the state of the economy.Gov. [read post]
Bowman Transportation Company, Inc., 424 U.S. 747 (1976), and later refined in International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. [read post]
22 Apr 2010, 9:58 am by thejaghunter
United States Marines only ever voice this sentiment with power and precision. [read post]
1 Apr 2011, 5:13 am by INFORRM
(The claimant had relied on the requirements in Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2007] 2 AC 167 at [19]). [read post]
9 Jul 2012, 8:05 am by Brian A. Comer
Hinson, Executive Director United States Consumer Product Safety DivisionWashington, D.C. [read post]
16 Aug 2012, 3:15 am by Andres
Analysis Football DataCo v Yahoo! [read post]
6 Nov 2007, 7:36 am
Box 1358 Hot Springs, AR 71902 Phone: (501) 624-4411 (V/TDD) Fax: (501) 624-019 DISABILITY ORGANIZATIONS ADAPT Arkansas ADAPT Leonard Boyle Phone: (501) 565-8495 Verlon McKay Phone: (501) 568-1887 Fax: (501) 821-4087 AIDS Arkansas AIDS Foundation P.O. [read post]
22 Mar 2023, 7:51 am by centerforartlaw
Social clubs must be supported by membership fees, dues, and assessments.[26] Most museums’ governance make-up and membership structure could be seen as a characteristic of a 501(c)(7) social club rather than a 501(c)(3) charitable nonprofit.[27] In American Campaign Academy v. [read post]
9 May 2017, 4:30 pm by INFORRM
But, by the end of the 1800s, this rationale lost currency, and by 1917 (in Bowman v Secular Society [1917] AC 406), the House of Lords held that blasphemy protected the religious sensitivities of the individual; but the courts still confined the scope of the offence to the established Church (this was confirmed as recently as 1991 in R v Chief Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Choudhury [1991] 1 QB 429). [read post]